Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
7 New Jersey opinions name it 3 courts 1955–1999 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by New Jersey courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
People v. Stanworthgreen2 sentences1999See Commonwealth v. McKenna, 476 Pa. 428 , 383 A.2d 174, 181 (1978) (“The waiver rule cannot be exalted to a position so lofty as to require this Court to blind itself to the real issue — the propriety of allowing a state to conduct an illegal execution of a citizen.”); People v. Stanworth, 71 Cal. 2d 820 , 80 Cal.Rptr. 49 , 457 P.2d 889, 899 (1969) (“The law cannot suffer the state’s interest and concern in the observance and enforcement of this policy [that in favor of capital appeals] to be thwarted through the guise of waiver of a personal right by an individual.”). 1999See Commonwealth v. McKenna, 476 Pa. 428 , 383 A.2d 174, 181 (1978) (“The waiver rule cannot be exalted to a position so lofty as to require this Court to blind itself to the real issue — the propriety of allowing a state to conduct an illegal execution of a citizen.”); People v. Stanworth, 71 Cal. 2d 820 , 80 Cal.Rptr. 49 , 457 P.2d 889, 899 (1969) (“The law cannot suffer the state’s interest and concern in the observance and enforcement of this policy [that in favor of capital appeals] to be thwarted through the guise of waiver of a personal right by an individual.”). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. McKennagreen2 sentences1999See Commonwealth v. McKenna, 476 Pa. 428 , 383 A.2d 174, 181 (1978) (“The waiver rule cannot be exalted to a position so lofty as to require this Court to blind itself to the real issue — the propriety of allowing a state to conduct an illegal execution of a citizen.”); People v. Stanworth, 71 Cal. 2d 820 , 80 Cal.Rptr. 49 , 457 P.2d 889, 899 (1969) (“The law cannot suffer the state’s interest and concern in the observance and enforcement of this policy [that in favor of capital appeals] to be thwarted through the guise of waiver of a personal right by an individual.”). 1999See Commonwealth v. McKenna, 476 Pa. 428 , 383 A.2d 174, 181 (1978) (“The waiver rule cannot be exalted to a position so lofty as to require this Court to blind itself to the real issue — the propriety of allowing a state to conduct an illegal execution of a citizen.”); People v. Stanworth, 71 Cal. 2d 820 , 80 Cal.Rptr. 49 , 457 P.2d 889, 899 (1969) (“The law cannot suffer the state’s interest and concern in the observance and enforcement of this policy [that in favor of capital appeals] to be thwarted through the guise of waiver of a personal right by an individual.”). | 1 | 1 |
Fort Lee Borough v. Director, Division of Taxationgreen1 sentence1994The court reasoned, under the entire controversy doctrine, that “having challenged the 1990 school aid table and resolved the issue involved, Fort lee may not now open issues it could have raised in last year’s litigation under the guise of a challenge to the current year’s school aid table. ” 12 N.J.Tax at 308 (emphasis added). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New Jersey. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Hotel Suburban System, Inc. v. Holderman
green
2 sentences1987Hotel Suburban System v. Holderman, supra, 42 N.J. 1987Hotel Suburban System v. Holderman, supra, 42 N.J.Super. at 90 . | 2 | 1987–1987 |
Siegfried v. City of Easton
green
2 sentences1998However, that Court's determination does not affect New Jersey's application of its own evidential rule. [10] The court also found none of the recognized applications of executive privilege to fit the facts at issue and rejected defendant's argument that disclosure would be against the "public interest," observing: "It would make no sense to allow the City, under whose color of authority Officer Schlegel has allegedly violated plaintiff's rights, to limit unilaterally the availability of relevant evidence under the guise of this privilege." Siegfried, supra, 146 F.R.D. at 101-02 . 1998However, that Court's determination does not affect New Jersey's application of its own evidential rule. [10] The court also found none of the recognized applications of executive privilege to fit the facts at issue and rejected defendant's argument that disclosure would be against the "public interest," observing: "It would make no sense to allow the City, under whose color of authority Officer Schlegel has allegedly violated plaintiff's rights, to limit unilaterally the availability of relevant evidence under the guise of this privilege." Siegfried, supra, 146 F.R.D. at 101-02 . | 1 | 1998–1998 |
Malaker Corp. Stockholders Protective Committee v. First Jersey National Bank
green
2 sentences1992It had knowledge of the facts that form the basis of its claim in this action at the time it filed the 1990 challenge. - Fort Lee’s failure to plead and litigate concerning matters then known to them in complete adjudication of a controversy in suit forecloses them from doing so now. [Malaker Corp. v. First Jersey National Bank, 163 N.J.Super. 463, 500 , 395 A.2d 222 (App.Div.1978)] Having challenged the 1990 school aid table and resolved the issue involved, Fort Lee may not now open issues it could have raised in last year’s litigation under the guise of a challenge to the current year’s scho 1992It had knowledge of the facts that form the basis of its claim in this action at the time it filed the 1990 challenge. - Fort Lee’s failure to plead and litigate concerning matters then known to them in complete adjudication of a controversy in suit forecloses them from doing so now. [Malaker Corp. v. First Jersey National Bank, 163 N.J.Super. 463, 500 , 395 A.2d 222 (App.Div.1978)] Having challenged the 1990 school aid table and resolved the issue involved, Fort Lee may not now open issues it could have raised in last year’s litigation under the guise of a challenge to the current year’s scho | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Langenohl v. Spearen, Preston & Burrows
green
1 sentence1955This court has held more than once that a statute creating a presumption which operates to deny a fair opportunity to rebut it violates the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. * * * If a legislative body is without power to enact as a rule of evidence a statute denying a litigant the right to prove the facts of his case, certainly the power cannot be made to emerge by putting the enactment in the guise of a rule of substantive law." *181 While the instant question appears to be of novel impression in this State, there is in the opinion of our Appellate Division in Langenohl v. Spea | 1 | 1955–1955 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.